SCO vs. Linux

GEC: Discuss gaming, computers and electronics and venture into the bizarre world of STGODs.

Moderator: Thanas

Post Reply
mauldooku
Jedi Master
Posts: 1302
Joined: 2003-01-26 07:12pm

SCO vs. Linux

Post by mauldooku »

I've heard this mentioned from time to time. From what I can gather, SCO owns the intellectual property rights to Unix and claims that Linux is a product of stolen code? Could someone clear this up for me? Any help would be appreciated, thank you all.
User avatar
Vendetta
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10895
Joined: 2002-07-07 04:57pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Post by Vendetta »

SCO own the IP rights to Unix.

They claim that the Linux kernel, as of revision 2.4, contains code that has been copied from their IP by IBM. They sued IBM for a large amount of money.

IBM promptly sued them back, charging that SCO cannot claim any rights to the code in the Linux 2.4 kernel, as SCO themselves distribute Linux under the terms of the GPL (meaning that they allow free reproduction of the code therein)

They further claim that everyone who has a copy of Linux should give them $699, unless they have a MP box, in which case they should pony up $1399.

From this, Red Hat have filed suit against SCO, on the grounds that they are engaging in deceptive trade practice and corporate libel, among other things.

SCO, for the record, is a company that bleeds money and is widely regarded to have one of the worst Unix models available. Not bad, considering they own the IP.

SCO have so far showed one example of what they claim is infringing code.

Torvalds says:
The code SCO showed represents an algorithm that can be used to manage a computer's memory...Not a very interesting piece of code in itself, this is very basic "allocate a smaller chunk of memory out of a list of bigger chunks." The function is described in a lot of places, and exists in original Unix code and is apparently written by Ken Thompson himself. It shows up in the Lion book (a commentary on the traditional Unix), and the code is described in [Maurice J.] Bach's "The Design of the Unix Operating System." In other words, it's not only 30 years old; it's actually been documented several times. It's also part of BSD Unix, which was shown to not be a derived work of the AT&T copyrights 10 years ago.
Post Reply